Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Guardianship etc., JORDANE JOHN C., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., John W., Respondent-Appellant, Cardinal McCloskey Services, Petitioner-Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about August 30, 2002, which, upon a fact-finding determination of permanent neglect, terminated the parental rights of appellant father and committed guardianship and custody of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that it used diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship by regularly scheduling visitation, assisting appellant in finding appropriate housing, scheduling conferences, arranging for a psychological examination of the child, and referring appellant to a parent skills training course pursuant to a court directive (see Social Services Law § 384-b[7][a],[f]; Matter of Star A., 55 N.Y.2d 560, 450 N.Y.S.2d 465, 435 N.E.2d 1080 [1982] ).
Notwithstanding petitioner's diligent efforts, appellant was irresponsible in planning for his son's return, failing to attend three service plan review conferences, demonstrating belated interest in the child, missing or arriving late to nearly half the scheduled visits with the child, refusing to attend an intensive parenting skills program as directed by the court, and failing to obtain suitable housing for his family in a timely fashion.
A preponderance of the evidence in this record supports the court's finding that the child's best interests call for termination of appellant's parental rights so as to facilitate adoption by the foster parents who have cared for this child since his birth (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824 [1984] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: January 18, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)